Incoherence Correction and Decision Making Based on Generalized Credal Sets

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10369)


While making decisions we meet different types of uncertainty. Recently the concept of generalized credal set has been proposed for modeling conflict, imprecision and contradiction in information. This concept allows us to generalize the theory of imprecise probabilities giving us possibilities to process information presented by contradictory (incoherent) lower previsions. In this paper we propose a new way of introducing generalized credal sets: we show that any contradictory lower prevision can be represented as a convex sum of non-contradictory and fully contradictory lower previsions. In this way we can introduce generalized credal sets and apply them to decision problems. Decision making is based on decision rules in the theory of imprecise probabilities and the contradiction-imprecision transformation that looks like incoherence correction.


Contradictory (incoherent) lower previsions Decision making Generalized credal sets Incoherence correction 


  1. 1.
    Augustin, T., Coolen, F.P.A., de Cooman, G., Troffaes, M.C.M. (eds.): Introduction to Imprecise Probabilities. Wiley, New York (2014)MATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bronevich, A.G., Klir, G.J.: Measures of uncertainty for imprecise probabilities: an axiomatic approach. Int. J. Approx. Reason. 51, 365–390 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bronevich, A.G., Rozenberg, I.N.: The generalization of the the conjunctive rule for aggregating contradictory sources of information based on generalized credal sets. In: Augustin, T., Doria, S., Miranda, E., Quaeghebeur, E. (eds.) Proceedings of the 9th International Symposium on Imprecise Probability: Theories and Applications, pp. 67–76. Aracne Editrice, Rome (2015)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bronevich, A.G., Rozenberg, I.N.: The extension of imprecise probabilities based on generalized credal sets. In: Ferraro, M.B., Giordani, P., Vantaggi, B., Gagolewski, M., Gil, M.A., Grzegorzewski, P., Hryniewicz, O. (eds.) Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing. 456, pp. 87–94. Springer Verlag, Berlin (2017)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brozzi, A., Capotorti, A., Vantaggi, B.: Incoherence correction strategies in statistical matching. Int. J. Approx. Reason. 53, 1124–1136 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Klir, G.J.: Uncertainty and Information: Foundations of Generalized Information Theory. Wiley-Interscience, Hoboken (2006)MATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Quaeghebeur, E.: Characterizing coherence, correcting incoherence. Int. J. Approx. Reason. 56(Part B), 208–233 (2015)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Walley, P.: Statistical Reasoning with Imprecise Probabilities. Chapman and Hall, London (1991)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Research University Higher School of EconomicsMoscowRussia
  2. 2.JSC Research, Development and Planning Institute for Railway Information Technology, Automation and TelecommunicationMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations